diego

That’s why I asked. I just read it myself and it doesn’t say that a catastrophe is imminent. It looks relatively mundane.

That does not contradict at all what I said. Why the downvote? Also, have you read the report?

I'm sure every day in the US there are many, many reports of structures with damage that needs to be fixed immediately (my house was one of them). Almost all of them don't collapse. Obviously there is a problem with the credibility of the reports because of conflicting incentives. Inspectors are usually from construction companies who want to get work, so they will always find something wrong with a building.

Edit: I don't understand the downvotes. Care to explain where you disagree? If thousands of daily reports warn of damage that must be fixed immediately and most are of no consequences (obviously) then the problem is that the reports don't accurately reflect the severity of the damage and the consequences of ignoring it.

Yes, it's a dark pattern in journalism. They hint at causation while having plausible deniability. Used to bother me too when I checked Yahoo Finance, every other day the market would be up/down "as" whatever happened that day that might have anything to do with the economy.

I built bip38, a java library for password-protected private keys in Bitcoin (and dogecoin) implementing the BIP388 standard.

https://github.com/dbasch/BIP38

And implementations of paper wallets for offline storage using it:

https://github.com/dbasch/dogecoin-paper-wallet/

https://github.com/dbasch/bitcoin-paper-wallet

No, he's right on this one. Corporate Development means "the group in charge of acquiring companies." I have never seen a Corp Dev team that did anything else (and I have dealt with quite a few including my company's acquisition).

Why is "preventable" even a meaningful label for a pandemic. All it means is that it wasn't inevitable, like death. It's like saying that you could have won a game you lost, if only you had played better.

There isn't one. It's just not true. There is lots of creative work that is routinely outsourced and cannot be automated yet. A CEO of a startup constantly outsources tasks to people, whenever they cannot be automated easily.

I'm just quoting her. My point is that she provides no math.

The author of the article may have some valid points, but she doesn't understand crypto so she completely discounts any mechanisms of value creation that might come from it. Near the end of the article it gets really bad. She attempts to make the case that paper menus are more efficient than apps, without doing any math whatsoever:

> For example, delivery apps make it feel “easy” to order food, when in fact we are spending much more in buying the phone, keeping it charged, paying our data plan, paying our subscriptions, and so on, for every order — in other words, we are using more hours of our labor to do so. Before smartphones, we could call the restaurant with a landline, but we also had to have previous knowledge of the restaurant as well as potentially a menu or at least a phone book’s yellow pages. The app replaces the drawerful of menus with a commensurate amount of electricity, which we pay for when we buy and charge our phone and pay our phone bill, which the restaurant pays for on their end in keeping their computers up, and which the app skims a huge percentage of to pay back venture-capitalist investors and keep the servers running.

If you look at only a single transaction, the app is much more efficient: Instead of requiring the restaurant to hire a printer and someone to deliver menus to you, you just press a button. But with a paper menu, restaurants have to do that only once, whereas you need to marshal the same amount of energy each time you use the app. By the third or fourth time you order takeout from a particular place, suddenly the paper menu is looking like an ecological marvel.

All this means is that moving Bitcoin in the main blockchain is not practical for most people. Bitcoin is an asset for an elite. Those who are interested in frequent cryptocurrency transactions should not be even paying attention to Bitcoin.

"Virtual money" is an oxymoron. Is a dollar in a bank account more virtual than a dollar bill or less virtual than a bitcoin?

If you google "Shaun Cromber" the only match is this article. No Shaun Cromber on Facebook either. Very high chance of being fake.

I am one. I have invested in some YC (and non-YC) companies over the years. About half of my investments are listed here.

https://angel.co/p/diego-basch

This points to a much more serious problem. This is 2021 and the technology is from the 90s, with a really poor user experience design. Your car warns you when you're low on fuel, but your server doesn't if you're low on critical resources.

No, that's not the point. I'm not talking about _me_ specifically, I'm talking about how the article has a prescriptive title. It implies that everyone should write this way. In reality it's about the author's preferences.

The main issue with the article is the imperative title. It's not "here's why I like to write in this style." It's telling the reader to write that way. Sorry but no, I won't write the way you do because you tell me to.

edit: the point of my comment is not that I won't write that way. It's that the author is talking about his own preferences, but the title makes it sound prescriptive. In a way it illustrates the opposite point. Opinions are nuanced, and a two-word title written in the imperative doesn't convey the nuance of what the author is trying to say.

It doesn't follow. Bitcoin chases cheap energy, so wherever green is cheaper than carbon that's where Bitcoin will be mined. Eventually carbon will be more expensive everywhere.

Mine, also 256, 8GB RAM, bought on 12/26/2020. Primarily a browsing machine (Chrome).

    SMART/Health Information (NVMe Log 0x02)
    Critical Warning:                   0x00
    Temperature:                        35 Celsius
    Available Spare:                    100%
    Available Spare Threshold:          99%
    Percentage Used:                    3%
    Data Units Read:                    117,454,110 [60.1 TB]
    Data Units Written:                 108,475,036 [55.5 TB]
    Host Read Commands:                 471,949,425
    Host Write Commands:                309,499,261

I have a 256GB, bought it exactly two months ago. 55TB written, 3%. Not doing anything crazy with it, it's mostly a Chrome machine.

Yes, 2014 in fact is when Hal Finney died, a few months after that post. He is perhaps the strongest candidate for Satoshi, and if so we'll probably never know.

The explanation the article doesn't give: 1) The category "country" is useless for this comparison. Monaco, Taiwan, New Zealand and China are all countries. 2) Population clustering, movement, demographics and culture, public policy. Move those dials in random directions, add exponential contagion and luck.

You don't need to leave, you can strike for example. "Condemning" does nothing.

Also keep in mind that the quote is from a different time. Today if something important happens I will find out about it even if I don't want to. An acquaintance will text me, or it will be discussed somewhere (everywhere perhaps) online. You'd have to make a huge effort to be "politically illiterate" in the sense Brecht describes, well beyond not reading the news.

It could be, but this is Occam's razor stuff. It doesn't sound hard, nobody knows what the factors are. Other people have tried it, they have not succeeded. Sama doesn't know what the other people look like. You'd have to prove that it's not luck by repeating it.

"none of it sounds that hard, and yet in the 15 years since, it hasn’t been close to replicated."

^ That right there is the definition of luck and timing. If it's not that hard, tons have tried, and nobody has replicated, then luck and/or timing must have been a huge factor. This doesn't seem to cross Sam's mind.

Never once in my life I thought "I wish I had taken notes when I met person X." I naturally remember something worth remembering to me, and never once I found out that there was something important that was said and I was worse off for not having written it down. Is it just me?

That is a really good article. The question that prompted is very telling: the asker fails to see nuance, and reduces OP's work to "backups." He/she might be more impressed if Colin were an author of tons of papers that collectively amounted to less than scrypt.

I am 145 lbs, live in San Francisco, I used to be a programmer (basically retired now). I met the mother of my son while bouldering at Mission Cliffs. She has nothing to do with the tech sector. Bouldering requires just a pair of shoes.

The author of this post is just a whiner. It's never been easier to meet people outside of your bubble than now.

There is no contradiction. We can all be altruistic or nasty depending on the context. We are messy and complicated animals, and we cooperate or defect depending on many signals. For those interested in this topic in depth (not just anecdotes like in the article) I recommend Behave by Robert Sapolsky.